Cargando…
The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients
Breath analysis using eNose technology can be used to discriminate between asthma and COPD patients, but it remains unclear whether results are influenced by smoking status. We aim to study whether eNose can discriminate between ever- vs. never-smokers and smoking <24 vs. >24 h before the exha...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7961431/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33806279 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules26051357 |
_version_ | 1783665259230265344 |
---|---|
author | Principe, Stefania van Bragt, Job J.M.H. Longo, Cristina de Vries, Rianne Sterk, Peter J. Scichilone, Nicola Vijverberg, Susanne J.H. Maitland-van der Zee, Anke H. |
author_facet | Principe, Stefania van Bragt, Job J.M.H. Longo, Cristina de Vries, Rianne Sterk, Peter J. Scichilone, Nicola Vijverberg, Susanne J.H. Maitland-van der Zee, Anke H. |
author_sort | Principe, Stefania |
collection | PubMed |
description | Breath analysis using eNose technology can be used to discriminate between asthma and COPD patients, but it remains unclear whether results are influenced by smoking status. We aim to study whether eNose can discriminate between ever- vs. never-smokers and smoking <24 vs. >24 h before the exhaled breath, and if smoking can be considered a confounder that influences eNose results. We performed a cross-sectional analysis in adults with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and healthy controls. Ever-smokers were defined as patients with current or past smoking habits. eNose measurements were performed by using the SpiroNose. The principal component (PC) described the eNose signals, and linear discriminant analysis determined if PCs classified ever-smokers vs. never-smokers and smoking <24 vs. >24 h. The area under the receiver–operator characteristic curve (AUC) assessed the accuracy of the models. We selected 593 ever-smokers (167 smoked <24 h before measurement) and 303 never-smokers and measured the exhaled breath profiles of discriminated ever- and never-smokers (AUC: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.66–0.81), and no cigarette consumption <24h (AUC 0.54, 95% CI: 0.43–0.65). In healthy controls, the eNose did not discriminate between ever or never-smokers (AUC 0.54; 95% CI: 0.49–0.60) and recent cigarette consumption (AUC 0.60; 95% CI: 0.50–0.69). The eNose could distinguish between ever and never-smokers in asthma and COPD patients, but not recent smokers. Recent smoking is not a confounding factor of eNose breath profiles. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7961431 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-79614312021-03-17 The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients Principe, Stefania van Bragt, Job J.M.H. Longo, Cristina de Vries, Rianne Sterk, Peter J. Scichilone, Nicola Vijverberg, Susanne J.H. Maitland-van der Zee, Anke H. Molecules Article Breath analysis using eNose technology can be used to discriminate between asthma and COPD patients, but it remains unclear whether results are influenced by smoking status. We aim to study whether eNose can discriminate between ever- vs. never-smokers and smoking <24 vs. >24 h before the exhaled breath, and if smoking can be considered a confounder that influences eNose results. We performed a cross-sectional analysis in adults with asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and healthy controls. Ever-smokers were defined as patients with current or past smoking habits. eNose measurements were performed by using the SpiroNose. The principal component (PC) described the eNose signals, and linear discriminant analysis determined if PCs classified ever-smokers vs. never-smokers and smoking <24 vs. >24 h. The area under the receiver–operator characteristic curve (AUC) assessed the accuracy of the models. We selected 593 ever-smokers (167 smoked <24 h before measurement) and 303 never-smokers and measured the exhaled breath profiles of discriminated ever- and never-smokers (AUC: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.66–0.81), and no cigarette consumption <24h (AUC 0.54, 95% CI: 0.43–0.65). In healthy controls, the eNose did not discriminate between ever or never-smokers (AUC 0.54; 95% CI: 0.49–0.60) and recent cigarette consumption (AUC 0.60; 95% CI: 0.50–0.69). The eNose could distinguish between ever and never-smokers in asthma and COPD patients, but not recent smokers. Recent smoking is not a confounding factor of eNose breath profiles. MDPI 2021-03-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7961431/ /pubmed/33806279 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules26051357 Text en © 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Principe, Stefania van Bragt, Job J.M.H. Longo, Cristina de Vries, Rianne Sterk, Peter J. Scichilone, Nicola Vijverberg, Susanne J.H. Maitland-van der Zee, Anke H. The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients |
title | The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients |
title_full | The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients |
title_fullStr | The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients |
title_full_unstemmed | The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients |
title_short | The Influence of Smoking Status on Exhaled Breath Profiles in Asthma and COPD Patients |
title_sort | influence of smoking status on exhaled breath profiles in asthma and copd patients |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7961431/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33806279 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/molecules26051357 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT principestefania theinfluenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT vanbragtjobjmh theinfluenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT longocristina theinfluenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT devriesrianne theinfluenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT sterkpeterj theinfluenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT scichilonenicola theinfluenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT vijverbergsusannejh theinfluenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT maitlandvanderzeeankeh theinfluenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT principestefania influenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT vanbragtjobjmh influenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT longocristina influenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT devriesrianne influenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT sterkpeterj influenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT scichilonenicola influenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT vijverbergsusannejh influenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients AT maitlandvanderzeeankeh influenceofsmokingstatusonexhaledbreathprofilesinasthmaandcopdpatients |